The present invention relates to vehicle safety and, more specifically, apparatuses and methods for monitoring and detecting seat belt usage.
Many states now have mandatory seat belt laws, but enforcement of seat belt laws has been ineffective. Enforcement of seat belt laws has been performed predominantly by visual detection by police personnel or by admission of violators. Obviously, visual detection from a distance becomes almost impossible and too subjective. Even at close distances, visual detection is subjective and prone to challenge in a court of law. Furthermore in inclement weather or under the cover of darkness, visual detection is nearly impossible. In contrast, radar guns that are used to detect vehicles traveling at excessive speeds and above the speed limit are reliable and not as prone to challenges in court. To date, detection devices, similar to radar guns, are not available for detecting seat belt usage.
Numerous sources indicate that seat belt usage is the single most effective piece of safety gear in vehicles. Auto industry employees, law enforcement personnel, the United States Department of Transportation (hereinafter xe2x80x9cUSDOTxe2x80x9d), the Federal Highway and National Highway Transportation and Safety Administration (hereinafter xe2x80x9cNHTSAxe2x80x9d) have emphasized that the use of seat belts remain the single most important safety factor for saving lives in a crash. The USDOT, Federal Highway and NHTSA have indicated that the largest single issue with them is preventing injuries, saving lives and saving money via seat belt usage. The USDOT and/or NHTSA have reported that xe2x80x9c[s]afety belts, when used, reduce the risk of fatal injury to front-seat passenger car occupants by 45 percent. Recent NHTSA analyses indicate an overall fatality-reducing effectiveness for air bags of 12 percent.xe2x80x9d In DOT HS 809 327 Traffic Safety Facts 2000 Occupant Protection, it indicates that seat belts are three and one-half times more effective than air bags in reducing fatal injuries. In DOT HS 809 349 November 2001, Norman Mineta, United States Secretary of Transportation, emphatically summarized the above in his Fourth Report to Congress, dated November 2001, xe2x80x9c[n]o other transportation initiative has greater potential for reducing deaths and injuries of Americans of all ages and races, which is why the Buckle Up America Campaign is so very, very important.xe2x80x9d
In TEA 21 Grants Information, NHTSA has printed and released information that indicates that for an average of one to four percentage points increase in seat belt usage rates, 232 to 940 lives would be saved annually; 5,700 to 23,000 non-fatal injuries would be prevented; and $64 million to $258 million in medical costs would be reduced. Significantly, this is for a nominal increase in percentage of seat belt usage, or specifically from one to four percentage points. In TEA 21 Grant Information, it was reported that a study conducted by NHTSA revealed that the average in-patient cost for crash victims, who were not using seat belts, was 55 percent higher than for those who used their seat belts.
To further illustrate the significance of the staggering potential for improvement with seat belt usage, Norman Mineta reported in his Fourth Report to Congress, see TEA 21 Grants Information, that xe2x80x9c[t]he average inpatient hospital charges for an unbelted driver exceed the inpatient, hospital charges of a belted driver by $5,000. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates that if the seat belt use rate for front seat passengers in automobiles and light trucks increased to 90 percent, Medicare and Medicaid alone would save $356 million each year. If the national seat belt use rate increased from 68 percent to 90 percent, over 5,500 additional lives would be saved and over 132,000 injuries would be prevented each year, resulting in an economic savings of about $8.8 billion annually.xe2x80x9d
Newspaper articles throughout the country regularly report tragic accidents resulting in serious injury and death that occur could have been prevented if the occupant(s) had been wearing a seat belt. The State Journal Register, Springfield, Ill., dated Jan. 1, 2002 reported a fatal crash that took the lives of two Riverton High School teenage youths, and specifically pointed out that they weren""t wearing seat belts. In the same newspaper dated Feb. 15, 2002, it was reported that a young, twenty-five year old professional baseball player, in only his second year of major league baseball, was tragically killed along with his twenty-three year old friend. A third occupant in the car was the only one out of the three that was wearing a seat belt and the only one that lived. During the accident, the other two occupants were ejected from the vehicle and died.
These examples are a mere sample and consistent with statistics that are provided by the NHTSA. In TEA 21 Grants Information, it was reported that xe2x80x9c[i]n fatal crashes, 75 percent of passenger car occupants who were totally ejected from the vehicle were killed. Safety belts are effective in preventing total ejections: only 1 percent of the occupants reported to have been using restraints were totally ejected, compared with 22 percent of the unrestrained occupants.xe2x80x9d
In an Associated Press release, dated Feb. 28, 2002, an article appeared in the Springfield, Illinois State Journal Register titled, xe2x80x9cGovernment backs away from xe2x80x98unrealisticxe2x80x99 seat belt use goal.xe2x80x9d Jeffrey Runge, head of the NHTSA, told a Senate Appropriations panel, in summarization, that seat belt usage has not met standards set by the previous Presidential Administration. Mr. Runge""s suggestion was to set more realistic goals. The decision was criticized by Senator Patty Murray, who leads the transportation subcommittee, for setting lower expectations. xe2x80x9cI believe in realistic goals, but I also believe when you lower your goal like that you send a very bad message, Murray, D-Wash., told Runge.xe2x80x9d
It has been expressed that the best way to increase seat belt usage rates by any significant levels is by further innovative techniques. In further published information released by USDOTxe2x80x94NHTSA on a Web site dated June 2001, it was reported that a key to obtaining higher seat belt usage rates is to have a law enforcement centerpiece for better enforcement. In DOT HS 809 291, dated June 2001, it was reported that xe2x80x9c[a] high profile enforcement effort is one of the best ways to increase seat belt use. No other interventionxe2x80x94except for passage of the law itselfxe2x80x94consistently shows equally powerful results.xe2x80x9d Further, the reason these efforts usually work is simple: xe2x80x9cif people perceive they are likely to get a ticket for not wearing a seat belt, they are much more likely to buckle up. Safety advocates have a powerful new weapon in their arsenalxe2x80x94law enforcement""s ability to pull over a motorist simply for violating the seat belt law. Yet, the power behind the law is not so much in the action itself, it is in how a standard enforcement law can increase a person""s perceived risk of being pulled over for not being buckled up.xe2x80x9d The statements on this Web site, in part, are describing the advocacy of a primary enforcement law where a state has a law that a person can be pulled over simply for violating the seat belt law, as opposed to what is called secondary enforcement law states where an enforcement officer has to have another reason for pulling a person over before being allowed to write a citation for a seat belt violation. However, it still remains that police or law enforcement officials do not have monitoring or detection devices for seat belt violations. This would lead to the prior mentioned actions of motorist""s perception that they are more likely to get pulled over and ticketed for not using a seat belt. The power of a new enforcement effort in this manner would not be so much in the action itself, but in how that action would increase a person""s perceived risk of being pulled over for not wearing a seat belt and thus would cause seat belt usage rates in and of itself to go up. It is estimated that this alone could increase the seat belt usage by as much as 5 to 10 percent.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,059,066 provides a great deal of information on seat belt devices that have been implemented recently. Most of these devices have been of the passive reminder variety to remind vehicle occupants that they do not have their seat belt on. Other more aggressive attempts have been made to get occupants to wear their seat belts, such as devices that do not allow the vehicle to start unless the occupants have their seat belts on. Some of these attempts and devices have been viewed as obtrusive on the driver or even life endangering in the case of certain emergencies. While some of these devices are helpful in getting some occupants to use seat belts, additional devices or methods are needed to encourage die-hard non-wearers to use their seat belt.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,059,066 takes a step in the direction of surveillance. However, the system lends itself to strong self-incrimination by illuminating lights that represent a vehicle occupant is not wearing his or her seat belt. Moreover, since seat belt use is not mandated in all states, this system may be unacceptable in some states. Also, this system will change the outside appearance of vehicles and may be unacceptable to automobile manufacturers in the presentation of its product to the buying consumer. Further, the public""s opinion weighs toward privacy in this touchy and sensitive, yet important, issue. It would be more acceptable from a privacy standpoint to allow only law enforcement personnel to monitor the use or non-use of seat belt laws.
It is apparent that a low cost and effective method and device to encourage individuals to wear seat belts is needed. Moreover, a method and device that only allows law enforcement personnel to monitor, enforce and apply the seat belt laws of various states is needed. Also, a method and device that is unobtrusive on the appearance of a vehicle is needed to facilitate acceptance by automobile manufacturers and the buying public.
The present invention is directed to overcome one or more of the problems and disadvantages as set forth above.
An aspect of the present invention is to provide apparatuses and methods for overcoming one or more of the problems and disadvantages set forth above.
In another aspect of the invention, there are methods and apparatuses for monitoring and detecting seat belt usage or lack thereof.
In yet another aspect of the invention, there is an electronic device having an enforcement device and vehicle device including transmitters and receivers for use in monitoring and detecting seat belt usage.
In still another aspect of the invention, there is an electronic vehicle devices installed in vehicles for receiving and transmitting signals for use in monitoring and detecting seat belt usage.
The above aspects are merely illustrative and should not be construed as all-inclusive and limiting to the scope of the invention. The aspects and advantages of the present invention will become apparent, as it becomes better understood from the following detailed description when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.